What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Big 12 wouldn't take us back... ROFL

Darth Snow

Hawaiian Buffalo
Club Member
Junta Member
http://newsok.com/would-the-big-12-take-back-buffs/article/3488157

This bozo read that bleacher report article and apparently none of the followup articles saying it was bull****... and then said that the big 12 wouldn't take us back cause we are a "consolation prize."

This is like the fat (insert male/female pejorative here) saying they wouldn't take someone back after they got their ass dumped for a better option. :rofl:
 
WELL IM A MAN... I MAY NOT BE 40, BUT I AM A MAN!!!! its the same women who sent gundy off the deep end
 
Buff4bcs 0 minutes ago
Wow, No wonder Gundy snapped. You are just a Terrible reporter, there is just no way around it. The Pac-10 had the final vote of approval in Mid-July. Get your facts right before you write such a preposterous story and if it is at all possible, make Gundy explode again cause that was hilarious.


tee hee
 
Wow, an uninformed article whose only sources are a midguided opinion, ridiculous bias and an uninformed opinion piece. Brought to us by a supporter of the historical athletic powerhouse OK State whose jilted bid to the PAC 10 came courtesy of the Oklahoma's coattails. Is this woman really suggesting that the PAC 10 didn't want CU (the second time the conference has offered membership)? Does she really believe they wanted OK State, a school without any substantial athletic reputation in a ****ty little town--a school with nothing in common with the PAC 10 either culturally or academically? The fate of OK State was always tied to Big Brother. How did CU panic? Why does she believe this deal isn't done...because of a retired guy's opinon on Bleacher Report? Did she do any research at all? Obviously not.

I'm speechless.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I couldn't help myself. I clicked the link :(

Arrrrrrrrrrggggggh

I knew, without a doubt before I clicked it, that the hack was J Carlson. EEEEEFFFFFFFing joke of a writer. Worse than tramel, if that's even possible.
 
Oh noes, the Mack 10 won't take us back. I'm devastated.

Did she run that article through the UT AD office before publication? That's the way it's supposed to work these days. I hope she got the memo.
 
Stupid kunt

Well if we learned anything from former CU President Betsy Hoffman during the whole scandal, it's that the word "kunt" can be used as a term of endearment! Chaucer even used "kunt" in a positive light in several of his writings, Ol' Bess is an expert on the subject being a medieval literature scholar and a "kunt" herself. And what a "kunt" she was!
 
This type article only helps Bohn negotiate the exit fee.

Seeing that CU wouldn't be taken back, then the computer monkey who typed this misguided piece of poorly reported crap missed an opportunity was her omission propose kicking CU out of the conference after the 2010 season.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think we should lock Jenni Carlson ( I don't care how this idiot spells her name) in a room with Mike Gundy for an hour with some concrete-hold hair gell and see what happens. Why do they let these moronic jock-sniffs into locker rooms. This (insert gender-pejorative term here) has no clue what college football or any of the governance thereof is related to.
 
I couldn't resist taking a jab at the daily bark-n-fart:

The article by Ms Carlson published by the Oklahoman, today, was a complete disservice to your readers. I find it interesting how the reporter took information from an article published on August 20th by the SF Examiner(1), added several personal opinions, and passed it off as "this-is-how-it-really-is".

It's a shame that the readers have to dig up the facts on our own. It appears that the writer did not check the status of conference expansion. Difficult information to obtain, you ask? No, not at all. The Deseret News(2) reported that the conference expansion was voted on, in -- get this -- JUNE. The blog post said, "My colleague Dirk Facer checked out whether anything can be done to keep Utah and Colorado out of the Pac-10 and found out there isn't. The final vote was taken in June." If the Deseret News could verify the status, well.......

Ms Carlson could have added more innuendo, if she so wished. She could have opined on how Mr Dickey and Mr Young feel about conference expansion. For background, Mr Dickey has covered Bay Area sports since 1963, and Mr Young was a UCLA chancellor from 1968 - 1997. The writer could have speculated further that perhaps these two "gentlemen" are traditionalists, and she could have wondered aloud about how one, or both, felt about conference expansion 30 years ago (when Arizona and Arizona State were added).

Alas, SB Nation(3) beat her to it; "The hopes of folks like Young and Dickey is that the presidents and chancellors will now overturn the decision (about which they were presumably consulted) to bring Colorado and Utah into the league. Good luck with that." Please note the key phrases in this quote, "...hopes...", and "...will now overturn the decision".

It's amusing that the readers have to uncover the facts for your reporters. Perhaps we could be paid for our efforts? No way? Oh well, it was worth a try.

(1) - http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/Di...10-Conference-not-all-positive-101138474.html

(2) - http://www.deseretnews.com/blog/41/10009807/Rockmonster-unplugged-Utah-Meets-Pac-10-Opposition.html

(3) - http://www.sbnation.com/2010/8/20/1634245/pac-10-realignment-expansion-chuck-young
 
Last edited:
I couldn't resist taking a jab at the daily bark-n-fart:

The article by Ms Carlson published by the Oklahoman, today, was a complete disservice to your readers. I find it interesting how the reporter took information from an article published on August 20th by the SF Examiner(1), added several personal opinions, and passed it off as "this-is-how-it-really-is".

It's a shame that the readers have to dig up the facts on our own. It appears that the writer did not check the status of conference expansion. Difficult information to obtain, you ask? No, not at all. The Deseret News(2) reported that the conference expansion was voted on, in -- get this -- JUNE. The blog post said, "My colleague Dirk Facer checked out whether anything can be done to keep Utah and Colorado out of the Pac-10 and found out there isn't. The final vote was taken in June." If the Deseret News could verify the status, well.......

Ms Carlson could have added more innuendo, if she so wished. She could have opined on how Mr Dickey and Mr Young feel about conference expansion. For background, Mr Dickey has covered Bay Area sports since 1963, and Mr Young was a UCLA chancellor from 1968 - 1997. The writer could have speculated further that perhaps these two "gentlemen" are traditionalists, and she could have wondered aloud about how one, or both, felt about conference expansion 30 years ago (when Arizona and Arizona State were added).

Alas, SB Nation(3) beat her to it; "The hopes of folks like Young and Dickey is that the presidents and chancellors will now overturn the decision (about which they were presumably consulted) to bring Colorado and Utah into the league. Good luck with that." Please note the key phrases in this quote, "...hopes...", and "...will now overturn the decision".

It's amusing that the readers have to uncover the facts for your reporters. Perhaps we could be paid for our efforts? No way? Oh well, it was worth a try.

(1) - http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/Di...10-Conference-not-all-positive-101138474.html

(2) - http://www.deseretnews.com/blog/41/10009807/Rockmonster-unplugged-Utah-Meets-Pac-10-Opposition.html

(3) - http://www.sbnation.com/2010/8/20/1634245/pac-10-realignment-expansion-chuck-young

Well said and well annotated.
 
If the PAC somehow sent both CU and Utah packing (which will not happen), you could stick a fork in the PAC ever being able to expand again. No one would accept an invitation from PAC ever again. You could flush all the PAC's forward thinking down the drain and I am pretty sure the PAC could kiss Larry Scott goodbye. He certainly wouldn't stay on for that sort of train wreck.
 
Interesting, BCS. Just visited newsok again. Your comments and Nate's comments (whoever he is) are shown. The other 31 are gone.

I reposted my editorial (tekilya made me do it).
 
http://www.5280.com/blog/?p=37481

RDB. post your comment one more time... :smile2:

Wow. What passes as news...

An opinion of a guy with now influence, gets picked up as an editorial sorta piece. That gets picked up as something factual by an idot in Oklahoma who can't be bothered with research or facts, and that article gets cited on another "no-think piece" on the same misguided topic. Impressive citation...
 
Back
Top